DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
The following is a non-final, first office action in response to the communication filed on 07/25/2025. Claims 1—20 are currently pending.
Priority
The Applicant’s claim for benefit of US Patent Application 18/224,966 (parent application) filed on 07/21/2023, which claims priority to Provisional US Patent Application 63/391,733, filed on 07/23/2022, has been received and acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5—8, and 13—17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Issued US Patent Application to Harris (US 4185689 A).
Regarding claim 1, Harris discloses [a] plug (bridge plug 10, see FIG. 1) deployable into a wellbore extending through a subterranean earthen formation to isolate a downhole section of the wellbore from an opposing uphole section of the wellbore (Col. 1, Lines 5—9, “[t]his invention relates to an improved bridge plug for wells and, more particularly, to an improved bridge plug in which the pressure differential acting across the bridge plug can be equalized prior to the removal of the bridge plug from the well.”), the plug comprising:
an annular sealing element (packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14 together constitute an annular sealing element, see FIG. 1) extending between a pair of longitudinally opposed ends (packer shoe elements 88 constitute the end of the identified annular sealing element) and configured to extend radially outwards into sealing engagement with a wall (see FIG. 2 and 3) of the wellbore in response to the plug transitioning from a run-in configuration (FIG. 1 depicts a run in configuration) to a set configuration (FIGs. 2 and 3 depict the set configuration where the packer assembly 14 is engaged with the wellbore wall);
a slip assembly coupled to the sealing element and configured to attach to the wall of the wellbore in response to the plug transitioning from a run-in configuration (see FIG. 1 where the slip assembly is retracted) to a set configuration (see FIGs. 2 and 3 where the slip assembly is engaged), wherein the slip assembly comprises one or more radially displaceable slip members (slips 17, see FIG. 2) and an extrusion ring (upper slip wedge 13, see FIG. 2) having a radially inclined outer surface (shaped portion 69 of upper slip wedge 13) configured to drive the one or more slip members radially outwards (see the difference in the configuration of slips 17 in FIG. 1 compared to FIGs. 2 and 3 where the slips are pushed up shaped portion 69 of upper slip wedge 13) and into engagement with the wall of the wellbore in response to the plug transitioning from a run-in configuration to a set configuration, wherein the extrusion ring is rotationally locked to one of the pair of longitudinally opposed ends of the sealing element with respect to a central axis of the plug (upper slip wedge 13 is rotationally locked to packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14 by way of pins 94 disposed in axial holes 79 of upper slip wedge 13; Col. 4, Lines 31—34, “[t]o prevent rotation of the back-up ring 83 and packer shoe 88, a plurality of pins 94 are inserted into holes 79 of the upper slip wedge 13 via holes 86 in back-up ring 83 and holes 93 in packer shoe 88.”; see FIG. 1); and
one or more connectors (pins 94), separate from the extrusion ring and the annular sealing element (pins 94 is coupled with but not part of packer shoe element 88, packer assembly 14, and upper slip wedge 13), and extending longitudinally between the annular sealing element and the extrusion ring to restrict relative rotation between the sealing element and the extrusion ring (pin 94, which is disposed longitudinally along the body of bridge plug 10, locks the packer elements and the slip wedge such that they do not rotate).
Regarding claim 3, Harris discloses wherein the extrusion ring comprises a radially inclined outer surface (shaped portion 69 of upper slip wedge 13) contacting a radially inner surface of the one or more slip members (slips 17 have a radially inclined surface which is in contact with shaped portion 69 of upper slip wedge 13, see FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Harris discloses wherein the one or more slip members comprises a slip belt (band 108; Col. 5, Lines 26—34, “[t]o retain the slips 17 and 17', each slip having one end resting on the appropriate slip wedge with the other end being supported in the appropriate annular channel, cylindrical metal bands 108 which are rectangular in cross section are installed in channel 68 or 68' of the slips 17 or 17' respectively. Upon setting of the bridge plug 10, the metal bands 108 are broken to allow the slips 17 and 17' to engage the wellbore.”).
Regarding claim 6, Harris discloses [a] plug (bridge plug 10, see FIG. 1) deployable into a wellbore extending through a subterranean earthen formation to isolate a downhole section of the wellbore from an opposing uphole section of the wellbore (Col. 1, Lines 5—9, “[t]his invention relates to an improved bridge plug for wells and, more particularly, to an improved bridge plug in which the pressure differential acting across the bridge plug can be equalized prior to the removal of the bridge plug from the well.”), the plug comprising:
an annular sealing element (packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14 together constitute an annular sealing element, see FIG. 1) extending between a pair of longitudinally opposed ends (packer shoe elements 88 constitute the end of the identified annular sealing element) and configured to extend radially outwards into sealing engagement with a wall (see FIG. 2 and 3) of the wellbore in response to the plug transitioning from a run-in configuration (FIG. 1 depicts a run in configuration) to a set configuration (FIGs. 2 and 3 depict the set configuration where the packer assembly 14 is engaged with the wellbore wall);
a slip assembly coupled to the sealing element and configured to attach to the wall of the wellbore in response to the plug transitioning from a run-in configuration (see FIG. 1 where the slip assembly is retracted) to a set configuration (see FIGs. 2 and 3 where the slip assembly is engaged), wherein the slip assembly comprises one or more radially displaceable slip members (slips 17, see FIG. 2) and an extrusion ring (upper slip wedge 13, see FIG. 2) having a radially inclined outer surface (shaped portion 69 of upper slip wedge 13) configured to drive the one or more slip members radially outwards (see the difference in the configuration of slips 17 in FIG. 1 compared to FIGs. 2 and 3 where the slips are pushed up shaped portion 69 of upper slip wedge 13) and into engagement with the wall of the wellbore in response to the plug transitioning from a run-in configuration to a set configuration, wherein the extrusion ring is rotationally locked to one of the pair of longitudinally opposed ends of the sealing element with respect to a central axis of the plug (upper slip wedge 13 is rotationally locked to packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14 by way of pins 94 disposed in axial holes 79 of upper slip wedge 13; Col. 4, Lines 31—34, “[t]o prevent rotation of the back-up ring 83 and packer shoe 88, a plurality of pins 94 are inserted into holes 79 of the upper slip wedge 13 via holes 86 in back-up ring 83 and holes 93 in packer shoe 88.”; see FIG. 1); and
a plurality of connectors (pins 94; Col. 4, Line 32—34; “a plurality of pins 94 are inserted into holes 79 of the upper slip wedge 13 via holes 86 in back-up ring 83 and holes 93 in packer shoe 88.”) circumferentially spaced around a central axis of the annular sealing element (See FIG. 1; Examiner notes the application explicitly states that a plurality of pins are disposed in a plurality of holes in both the upper slip wedge 13 and the backup ring 83 which implicitly requires that the pins are disposed around the circumference of the tool) and each extending longitudinally between the annular sealing element and the extrusion ring to restrict relative rotation between the sealing element and the extrusion ring (pin 94, which is disposed longitudinally along the body of bridge plug 10, locks the packer elements and the slip wedge such that they do not rotate).
Regarding claim 7, Harris discloses wherein each of the plurality of connectors (pins 94) has a central axis that is radially spaced from the central axis of the annular sealing element (packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14 together constitute an annular sealing element, see FIG. 1; as further depicted in FIG. 1, pins 94 have a central axis which is closer to the center axis of bridge plug 10 while packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14 share a center axis which is further from the center axis of bridge plug 10 than the center axis of pins 94).
Regarding claim 8, Harris discloses wherein each of the plurality of connectors extends longitudinally between an opposing pair of terminal ends (the terminal ends of pins 94 extend longitudinally along a length of bridge plug 10 which reads on the limitations of claim 6; see pins 94 in FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Harris discloses wherein the extrusion ring comprises a radially inclined outer surface (shaped portion 69 of upper slip wedge 13) contacting a radially inner surface of the one or more slip members (slips 17 have a radially inclined surface which is in contact with shaped portion 69 of upper slip wedge 13, see FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 14, Harris discloses [a] plug (bridge plug 10, see FIG. 1) deployable into a wellbore extending through a subterranean earthen formation to isolate a downhole section of the wellbore from an opposing uphole section of the wellbore (Col. 1, Lines 5—9, “[t]his invention relates to an improved bridge plug for wells and, more particularly, to an improved bridge plug in which the pressure differential acting across the bridge plug can be equalized prior to the removal of the bridge plug from the well.”), the plug comprising:
an annular sealing element (packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14 together constitute an annular sealing element, see FIG. 1) extending between a pair of longitudinally opposed ends (packer shoe elements 88 constitute the end of the identified annular sealing element) and configured to extend radially outwards into sealing engagement with a wall (see FIG. 2 and 3) of the wellbore in response to the plug transitioning from a run-in configuration (FIG. 1 depicts a run in configuration) to a set configuration (FIGs. 2 and 3 depict the set configuration where the packer assembly 14 is engaged with the wellbore wall);
a slip assembly coupled to the sealing element and configured to attach to the wall of the wellbore in response to the plug transitioning from a run-in configuration (see FIG. 1 where the slip assembly is retracted) to a set configuration (see FIGs. 2 and 3 where the slip assembly is engaged), wherein the slip assembly comprises one or more radially displaceable slip members (slips 17, see FIG. 2) and an extrusion ring (upper slip wedge 13, see FIG. 2) having a radially inclined outer surface (shaped portion 69 of upper slip wedge 13) configured to drive the one or more slip members radially outwards (see the difference in the configuration of slips 17 in FIG. 1 compared to FIGs. 2 and 3 where the slips are pushed up shaped portion 69 of upper slip wedge 13) and into engagement with the wall of the wellbore in response to the plug transitioning from a run-in configuration to a set configuration, wherein the extrusion ring is rotationally locked to one of the pair of longitudinally opposed ends of the sealing element with respect to a central axis of the plug (upper slip wedge 13 is rotationally locked to packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14 by way of pins 94 disposed in axial holes 79 of upper slip wedge 13; Col. 4, Lines 31—34, “[t]o prevent rotation of the back-up ring 83 and packer shoe 88, a plurality of pins 94 are inserted into holes 79 of the upper slip wedge 13 via holes 86 in back-up ring 83 and holes 93 in packer shoe 88.”; see FIG. 1); and
one or more elongate connectors (pins 94) having opposing terminal ends (pins 94 fulfill this limitation) extending longitudinally between the annular sealing element and the extrusion ring to restrict relative rotation between the sealing element and the extrusion ring (pin 94, which is disposed longitudinally along the body of bridge plug 10, locks the packer elements and the slip wedge such that they do not rotate).
Regarding claim 15, Harris discloses wherein a first of the opposing terminal ends of the one or more elongate connectors is coupled to the annular sealing element and a second of the opposing terminal ends of the one or more elongate connectors is coupled to the extrusion ring (all of the elements of the bridge plug 10 are coupled together thereby fulfilling the required limitations of claim 15; see also FIG. 1 where pins 94 also physically engage with the sealing element and extrusion ring as identified in claim 14).
Regarding claim 16, Harris discloses wherein a first of the opposing terminal ends of the one or more elongate connectors (pins 94) is received in the annular sealing element (packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14 ) and a second of the opposing terminal ends of the one or more elongate connectors is received in the extrusion ring (upper slip wedge 13, see FIG. 2; Col. 4, Lines 31—34, “[t]o prevent rotation of the back-up ring 83 and packer shoe 88, a plurality of pins 94 are inserted into holes 79 of the upper slip wedge 13 via holes 86 in back-up ring 83 and holes 93 in packer shoe 88.”; see FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Harris discloses wherein the one or more elongate connectors (pins 94) has a central axis that is radially spaced from the central axis of the annular sealing element (packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14 together constitute an annular sealing element, see FIG. 1; as further depicted in FIG. 1, pins 94 have a central axis which is closer to the center axis of bridge plug 10 while packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14 share a center axis which is further from the center axis of bridge plug 10 than the center axis of pins 94).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2, 4, 9—11, and 18—20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Issued US Patent Application to Harris (US 4185689 A) as applied to claims 1, 6, and 14 above, and further in view of Published US Patent Application to Power et al., hereinafter “Power” (US 20200347694 A1).
Regarding claim 2, while Harris discloses a bridge plug 10 as set forth in the disclosure of Harris, and as provided above with respect to claim 1, Harris may not disclose the limitation “wherein the plug includes components that are formed of at least one of a magnesium alloy and an aluminum alloy to dissolve in the wellbore.” However, Power, which is in the same field of endeavor as the instant application insofar as it is directed to a bridge plug which is deployable in a wellbore to isolate an uphole section of the wellbore from a downhole section of the wellbore, discloses the deficient limitations.
For example, Power discloses wherein the plug (bridge plug 1000; para. [0019], “[t]he bridge plugs described herein may have some millable parts and some dissolvable parts for longer term life.”) includes components that are formed of at least one of a magnesium alloy and an aluminum alloy (para. [0027], “[w]ith respect to dissolvable or galvanically-corrodible metals used as a dissolvable material… Suitable galvanically-corrodible metals also include a nano-structured matrix galvanic materials. One example of a nano-structured matrix micro-galvanic material is a magnesium alloy with iron-coated inclusions… Micro-galvanically corrodible magnesium alloys could also be solution structured with other elements such as zinc, aluminum, nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, rare earth elements, et cetera. Micro-galvanically corrodible aluminum alloys could be in solution with elements such as nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, gallium, et cetera. Of these galvanically-corrodible metals, magnesium and magnesium alloys may be preferred.”) to dissolve in the wellbore (para. [0019], “The conditions for degradation or dissolution are generally wellbore conditions where an external stimulus may be used to initiate or effect the rate of degradation.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bridge plug of Harris to include dissolvable parts in accordance with the teachings of Power where, as further taught by Power, the dissolvable portions may be made from aluminum or magnesium alloys. Both Harris and Power disclose a bridge plug where the components of the bridge plugs are described in each respective application such that the replacement of the non-dissolvable components of Harris for the dissolvable components of Power would generate the predictable result of a bridge plug with dissolvable components.
Regarding claim 4, while Harris discloses a bridge plug 10 as set forth in the disclosure of Harris, and as provided above with respect to claim 1, Harris may not disclose the limitations of claim 4. However, Power, which is in the same field of endeavor as the instant application insofar as it is directed to a bridge plug which is deployable in a wellbore to isolate an uphole section of the wellbore from a downhole section of the wellbore, discloses the deficient limitations.
For example, Power discloses wherein the plug (bridge plug 1000; para. [0019], “[t]he bridge plugs described herein may have some millable parts and some dissolvable parts for longer term life.”) comprises one or more first components formed of at least one of a magnesium alloy and an aluminum alloy (para. [0027], “[w]ith respect to dissolvable or galvanically-corrodible metals used as a dissolvable material… Suitable galvanically-corrodible metals also include a nano-structured matrix galvanic materials. One example of a nano-structured matrix micro-galvanic material is a magnesium alloy with iron-coated inclusions… Micro-galvanically corrodible magnesium alloys could also be solution structured with other elements such as zinc, aluminum, nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, rare earth elements, et cetera. Micro-galvanically corrodible aluminum alloys could be in solution with elements such as nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, gallium, et cetera. Of these galvanically-corrodible metals, magnesium and magnesium alloys may be preferred.”) and one or more second components formed from a fiber reinforced material (para. [0066], “in some embodiments, the slip ring 104, the element backup ring 108, the sealing element 106, and the setting cone 110 may each be made of non-dissolving, but easily millable materials such as, but not limited to, a composite epoxy and glass fiber, fiberglass, a thermoplastic, a fiber filled plastic, an aluminum alloy, or similar materials that are easy to mill.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bridge plug of Harris to include both millable and dissolvable parts in accordance with the teachings of Power where, as further taught by Power, the dissolvable portions may be made from aluminum or magnesium alloys and the millable parts may be made from fiber reinforced material. Both Harris and Power disclose a bridge plug where the components of the bridge plugs are described in each respective application such that the replacement of the non-dissolvable components of Harris for the dissolvable components of Power would generate the predictable result of a bridge plug with both millable and dissolvable components.
Regarding claim 9, while Harris discloses a bridge plug 10 as set forth in the disclosure of Harris, and as provided above with respect to claim 6, Harris may not disclose the limitation “wherein the plug includes components that are formed of at least one of a magnesium alloy and an aluminum alloy to dissolve in the wellbore.” However, Power, which is in the same field of endeavor as the instant application insofar as it is directed to a bridge plug which is deployable in a wellbore to isolate an uphole section of the wellbore from a downhole section of the wellbore, discloses the deficient limitations. For example, Power discloses wherein the plug (bridge plug 1000; para. [0019], “[t]he bridge plugs described herein may have some millable parts and some dissolvable parts for longer term life.”) includes components that are formed of at least one of a magnesium alloy and an aluminum alloy (para. [0027], “[w]ith respect to dissolvable or galvanically-corrodible metals used as a dissolvable material… Suitable galvanically-corrodible metals also include a nano-structured matrix galvanic materials. One example of a nano-structured matrix micro-galvanic material is a magnesium alloy with iron-coated inclusions… Micro-galvanically corrodible magnesium alloys could also be solution structured with other elements such as zinc, aluminum, nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, rare earth elements, et cetera. Micro-galvanically corrodible aluminum alloys could be in solution with elements such as nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, gallium, et cetera. Of these galvanically-corrodible metals, magnesium and magnesium alloys may be preferred.”) to dissolve in the wellbore (para. [0019], “The conditions for degradation or dissolution are generally wellbore conditions where an external stimulus may be used to initiate or effect the rate of degradation.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bridge plug of Harris to include dissolvable parts in accordance with the teachings of Power where, as further taught by Power, the dissolvable portions may be made from aluminum or magnesium alloys. Both Harris and Power disclose a bridge plug where the components of the bridge plugs are described in each respective application such that the replacement of the non-dissolvable components of Harris for the dissolvable components of Power would generate the predictable result of a bridge plug with dissolvable components.
Regarding claim 10, while Harris discloses a bridge plug 10 as set forth in the disclosure of Harris, and as provided above with respect to claim 6, Harris may not disclose the limitations of claim 10. However, Power, which is in the same field of endeavor as the instant application insofar as it is directed to a bridge plug which is deployable in a wellbore to isolate an uphole section of the wellbore from a downhole section of the wellbore, discloses the deficient limitations. For example, Power discloses wherein the plug (bridge plug 1000; para. [0019], “[t]he bridge plugs described herein may have some millable parts and some dissolvable parts for longer term life.”) comprises one or more first components formed of at least one of a magnesium alloy and an aluminum alloy (para. [0027], “[w]ith respect to dissolvable or galvanically-corrodible metals used as a dissolvable material… Suitable galvanically-corrodible metals also include a nano-structured matrix galvanic materials. One example of a nano-structured matrix micro-galvanic material is a magnesium alloy with iron-coated inclusions… Micro-galvanically corrodible magnesium alloys could also be solution structured with other elements such as zinc, aluminum, nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, rare earth elements, et cetera. Micro-galvanically corrodible aluminum alloys could be in solution with elements such as nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, gallium, et cetera. Of these galvanically-corrodible metals, magnesium and magnesium alloys may be preferred.”) and one or more second components formed from a fiber reinforced material (para. [0066], “in some embodiments, the slip ring 104, the element backup ring 108, the sealing element 106, and the setting cone 110 may each be made of non-dissolving, but easily millable materials such as, but not limited to, a composite epoxy and glass fiber, fiberglass, a thermoplastic, a fiber filled plastic, an aluminum alloy, or similar materials that are easy to mill.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bridge plug of Harris to include both millable and dissolvable parts in accordance with the teachings of Power where, as further taught by Power, the dissolvable portions may be made from aluminum or magnesium alloys and the millable parts may be made from fiber reinforced material. Both Harris and Power disclose a bridge plug where the components of the bridge plugs are described in each respective application such that the replacement of the non-dissolvable components of Harris for the dissolvable components of Power would generate the predictable result of a bridge plug with both millable and dissolvable components.
Regarding claim 11, Harris discloses wherein the plug (bridge plug 10) comprises a mandrel (mandrel 11, see FIGs. 1—3) and a nose (see plug 126 in FIG. 1, which is disposed at a downhole end of the tool) coupled to the mandrel (all of the elements are coupled together to form bridge plug 10) and defining a downhole end of the plug (plug 126 in FIG. 1 is disposed at a downhole end of the tool).
While Harris discloses a bridge plug, Harris may not disclose a bridge plug with dissolvable components. Accordingly, Harris may not explicitly disclose the limitation wherein the mandrel and the nose are formed from dissolvable materials while the remainder of the plug is formed from non-dissolvable materials. However, Power, which is in the same field of endeavor as the instant application insofar as it is directed to a bridge plug which isolates an uphole portion of a wellbore from a downhole portion of a wellbore teaches the deficient limitations. For example, Power teaches wherein the plug (bridge plug 100) comprises a mandrel (mandrel 112) and a nose (guide shoe 102) coupled to the mandrel (the guide shoe 102 and mandrel 112 are coupled together to create bridge plug 100 as depicted in FIG. 1A) and defining a downhole end of the plug (see FIG. 1A of Power where guide shoe 102 is the downhole end of bridge plug 100), and wherein the mandrel and the nose are formed from dissolvable materials while the remainder of the plug is formed from non-dissolvable materials (Power, para. [0033], “the bridge plug 100 may include a guide shoe 102, a slip ring 104, a sealing element 106, an element backup ring 108, a setting cone 110, and a mandrel 112. Some or all of the foregoing parts may be made of any of the dissolvable materials mentioned herein… Some of the parts may be manufactured with two or more dissolvable alloys, which allows the alloy located along the outside (e.g., further from the centerline of the bridge plug 100) to dissolve slowly and the alloy located inside (e.g., closer to the centerline of the bridge plug 100) to dissolve more quickly, or vice-versa.”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bridge plug of Harris to include dissolvable components including specifically a dissolvable mandrel and/or a dissolvable plug nose as taught by Power. Moreover, Power teaches that any and/or all of the components of the bridge plug may be manufactured to be dissolvable. As such, the requisite plug nose and mandrel as claimed may be made dissolvable by known methods to render the predictable result of a bridge plug which includes dissolvable components.
Regarding claim 18, while Harris discloses a bridge plug 10 as set forth in the disclosure of Harris, and as provided above with respect to claim 14, Harris may not disclose the limitation “wherein the plug includes components that are formed of at least one of a magnesium alloy and an aluminum alloy to dissolve in the wellbore.” However, Power, which is in the same field of endeavor as the instant application insofar as it is directed to a bridge plug which is deployable in a wellbore to isolate an uphole section of the wellbore from a downhole section of the wellbore, discloses the deficient limitations. For example, Power discloses wherein the plug (bridge plug 1000; para. [0019], “[t]he bridge plugs described herein may have some millable parts and some dissolvable parts for longer term life.”) includes components that are formed of at least one of a magnesium alloy and an aluminum alloy (para. [0027], “[w]ith respect to dissolvable or galvanically-corrodible metals used as a dissolvable material… Suitable galvanically-corrodible metals also include a nano-structured matrix galvanic materials. One example of a nano-structured matrix micro-galvanic material is a magnesium alloy with iron-coated inclusions… Micro-galvanically corrodible magnesium alloys could also be solution structured with other elements such as zinc, aluminum, nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, rare earth elements, et cetera. Micro-galvanically corrodible aluminum alloys could be in solution with elements such as nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, gallium, et cetera. Of these galvanically-corrodible metals, magnesium and magnesium alloys may be preferred.”) to dissolve in the wellbore (para. [0019], “The conditions for degradation or dissolution are generally wellbore conditions where an external stimulus may be used to initiate or effect the rate of degradation.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bridge plug of Harris to include dissolvable parts in accordance with the teachings of Power where, as further taught by Power, the dissolvable portions may be made from aluminum or magnesium alloys. Both Harris and Power disclose a bridge plug where the components of the bridge plugs are described in each respective application such that the replacement of the non-dissolvable components of Harris for the dissolvable components of Power would generate the predictable result of a bridge plug with dissolvable components.
Regarding claim 19, while Harris discloses a bridge plug 10 as set forth in the disclosure of Harris, and as provided above with respect to claim 14, Harris may not disclose the limitations of claim 19. However, Power, which is in the same field of endeavor as the instant application insofar as it is directed to a bridge plug which is deployable in a wellbore to isolate an uphole section of the wellbore from a downhole section of the wellbore, discloses the deficient limitations. For example, Power discloses wherein the plug (bridge plug 1000; para. [0019], “[t]he bridge plugs described herein may have some millable parts and some dissolvable parts for longer term life.”) comprises one or more first components formed of at least one of a magnesium alloy and an aluminum alloy (para. [0027], “[w]ith respect to dissolvable or galvanically-corrodible metals used as a dissolvable material… Suitable galvanically-corrodible metals also include a nano-structured matrix galvanic materials. One example of a nano-structured matrix micro-galvanic material is a magnesium alloy with iron-coated inclusions… Micro-galvanically corrodible magnesium alloys could also be solution structured with other elements such as zinc, aluminum, nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, rare earth elements, et cetera. Micro-galvanically corrodible aluminum alloys could be in solution with elements such as nickel, iron, carbon, tin, silver, copper, titanium, gallium, et cetera. Of these galvanically-corrodible metals, magnesium and magnesium alloys may be preferred.”) and one or more second components formed from a fiber reinforced material (para. [0066], “in some embodiments, the slip ring 104, the element backup ring 108, the sealing element 106, and the setting cone 110 may each be made of non-dissolving, but easily millable materials such as, but not limited to, a composite epoxy and glass fiber, fiberglass, a thermoplastic, a fiber filled plastic, an aluminum alloy, or similar materials that are easy to mill.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bridge plug of Harris to include both millable and dissolvable parts in accordance with the teachings of Power where, as further taught by Power, the dissolvable portions may be made from aluminum or magnesium alloys and the millable parts may be made from fiber reinforced material. Both Harris and Power disclose a bridge plug where the components of the bridge plugs are described in each respective application such that the replacement of the non-dissolvable components of Harris for the dissolvable components of Power would generate the predictable result of a bridge plug with both millable and dissolvable components.
Regarding claim 20, Harris discloses wherein the plug (bridge plug 10) comprises a mandrel (mandrel 11, see FIGs. 1—3) and a nose (see plug 126 in FIG. 1, which is disposed at a downhole end of the tool) coupled to the mandrel (all of the elements are coupled together to form bridge plug 10) and defining a downhole end of the plug (plug 126 in FIG. 1 is disposed at a downhole end of the tool).
While Harris discloses a bridge plug, Harris may not disclose a bridge plug with dissolvable components. Accordingly, Harris may not explicitly disclose the limitation wherein the mandrel and the nose are formed from dissolvable materials while the remainder of the plug is formed from non-dissolvable materials. However, Power, which is in the same field of endeavor as the instant application insofar as it is directed to a bridge plug which isolates an uphole portion of a wellbore from a downhole portion of a wellbore teaches the deficient limitations. For example, Power teaches wherein the plug (bridge plug 100) comprises a mandrel (mandrel 112) and a nose (guide shoe 102) coupled to the mandrel (the guide shoe 102 and mandrel 112 are coupled together to create bridge plug 100 as depicted in FIG. 1A) and defining a downhole end of the plug (see FIG. 1A of Power where guide shoe 102 is the downhole end of bridge plug 100), and wherein the mandrel and the nose are formed from dissolvable materials while the remainder of the plug is formed from non-dissolvable materials (Power, para. [0033], “the bridge plug 100 may include a guide shoe 102, a slip ring 104, a sealing element 106, an element backup ring 108, a setting cone 110, and a mandrel 112. Some or all of the foregoing parts may be made of any of the dissolvable materials mentioned herein… Some of the parts may be manufactured with two or more dissolvable alloys, which allows the alloy located along the outside (e.g., further from the centerline of the bridge plug 100) to dissolve slowly and the alloy located inside (e.g., closer to the centerline of the bridge plug 100) to dissolve more quickly, or vice-versa.”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bridge plug of Harris to include dissolvable components including specifically a dissolvable mandrel and/or a dissolvable plug nose as taught by Power. Moreover, Power teaches that any and/or all of the components of the bridge plug may be manufactured to be dissolvable. As such, the requisite plug nose and mandrel as claimed may be made dissolvable by known methods to render the predictable result of a bridge plug which includes dissolvable components.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Issued US Patent Application to Harris (US 4185689 A) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Issued US Patent Application to to Tse et al., hereinafter “Tse” (US 10233720 B2).
While Harris discloses that the extrusion ring (e.g., upper slip wedge 13) and sealing element (packer shoe element 88 and packer assembly 14) are coupled by pins 94, Harris may not disclose the limitations of claim 12. However, Tse, which is in the same field of endeavor as the instant application insofar as it is directed to a wellbore plug which isolates an upper section of a wellbore from a lower section of a wellbore (e.g., including frac plugs and bridge plugs) teaches the deficient limitation.
For example, Tse teaches wherein the extrusion ring is bonded to the sealing element by an adhesive (Tse, Col 4, Lines 21—20, “[t]he configuration and use of lower slips 68 enables construction of plug 30 without an expandable backup ring. In the illustrated configuration, the lower cone 38 is placed immediately adjacent the sealing element 44 so the lower tapered surface 64 of lower cone 38 extends relatively closely to, e.g. touches, the resilient sealing element 44. By way of example, the lower cone 38 may be bonded to the sealing element 44 via a suitable adhesive or other bonding agent.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Harris to include an adhesive between the extrusion ring and the sealing element in accordance with the teaching of Tse by known methods in accordance with the disclosure of Tse. The combination as modified would render the predictable result of a backup method for preventing relative rotation between the sealing element and the extrusion ring.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Issued US Patent Application to Berscheidt et al. (US 10323478 B2) which teaches wellbore equipment used in a casing string and states “[t]he assembly of the sealing element, wedges, and slips are held in position by a pair of slip support rings 104, which can be temporarily held in longitudinal position to the mandrel 102 by one or more restraining elements 114 such as shear pins, screws such as set screws, adhesive applied to the relative components, and the like and can be removable.” (Col. 12, Lines 57—62); and
Issued US Patent Application to Eaton et al. (US 12180802 B2) which teaches a plug used in a wellbore where the plug includes components manufactured from both dissolvable materials including magnesium alloys along with components made from fiber-reinforced (“composite”) materials.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to URSULA NORRIS whose telephone number is (703)756-4731. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 7 AM to 4 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, TARA SCHIMPF can be reached at 571-270-7741. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/U.L.N./Examiner, Art Unit 3676
/TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights